Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 20, 2026
Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Potential Pitfalls of Reporting and Bias in Observational Studies With Propensity Score Analysis Assessing a Surgical
Guillaume Lonjon1, Raphael Porcher, Patrick Ergina
1*INSERM, UMR 1153, Centre of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics Sorbonne Paris Cité (CRESS), METHODS Team, Paris, France †Orthopaedic Department, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, European Hospital Georges Pompidou, Paris, France ‡Medical school, Paris Descartes university, Sorbonne Paris cité, Paris, France §Centre of research in epidemiology and statistics Sorbonne Paris Cité , Hopital Hotel dieu, place du Parvis notre dame, Paris, France ¶Department of Surgery, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada.
Objective:
To describe the evolution of the use and reporting of propensity score (PS) analysis in observational studies assessing a surgical procedure.
Background:
Assessing surgery in randomized controlled trials raises several challenges. Observational studies with PS analysis are a robust alternative for comparative effectiveness research.
Methods:
In this methodological systematic review, we identified all PubMed reports of observational studies with PS analysis that evaluated a surgical procedure and described the evolution of their use over time. Then, we selected a sample of articles published from August 2013 to July 2014 and systematically appraised the quality of reporting and potential bias of the PS analysis used.
Results:
We selected 652 reports of observational studies with PS analysis. The publications increased over time, from 1 report in 1987 to 198 in 2013. Among the 129 reports assessed, 20% (n = 24) did not detail the covariates included in the PS and 77% (n = 100) did not report a justification for including these covariates in the PS. The rate of missing data for potential covariates was reported in 9% of articles. When a crossover by conversion was possible, only 14% of reports (n = 12) mentioned this issue. For matched analysis, 10% of articles reported all 4 key elements that allow for reproducibility of a PS-matched analysis (matching ratio, method to choose the nearest neighbors, replacement and method for statistical analysis).
Conclusions:
Observational studies with PS analysis in surgery are increasing in frequency, but specific methodological issues and weaknesses in reporting exist.
More Related Videos
05:50Author Spotlight: Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Gastric Content Assessment and Risk Stratification in Perioperative Care
Published on: September 22, 2023
03:07Single-Port Robotic-assisted Transaxillary Breast-conserving Surgery: A Prospective, Single-arm, Non-randomized Phase IIa Clinical Trial
Published on: August 19, 2025
Related Concept Videos
01:29Bias in Epidemiological Studies
01:22Bias
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
02:07Blind Procedures
01:30Psychosurgery
Historical Development of Psychosurgery
In the 1930s, Portuguese neurologist Antonio Egas Moniz introduced a surgical procedure designed...
01:11Observational Studies
There are three types of observational studies – Prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional.
Prospective Study
Prospective studies, also known as longitudinal or cohort studies, are carried out by collecting future data from groups sharing similar characteristics. One...